Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 29th Jan 2010 16:08 UTC
Oracle and SUN "Several of the concerns about Oracle's acquisition of Sun have revolved around how Unix technologies led by Sun would continue under the new ownership. As it turns out, Solaris users might not have much to worry about, as Oracle executives on Wednesday affirmed their commitment to preserving the efforts. In the case of Solaris, Oracle had already been a big supporter of the rival Linux operating system. Oracle has its own Enterprise Linux offering, based on Red Hat Enterprise Linux. For Oracle CEO Larry Ellison, the idea that Linux and Solaris are mutually exclusive is a false choice."
Thread beginning with comment 406785
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
irbis
Member since:
2005-07-08

Solaris and other Unix variants are good, and have some features lacking from Linux. But let's not forget that almost 90 % of the world's top 500 super computers already run Linux and that trend is only growing: http://blog.internetnews.com/skerner/2009/11/linux-dominates-top-50... That should make it quite clear to everyone that Linux is perfectly ready for (if not already dominating) the high-end server field.

However, organizations using super computers have large and excellent admin teams who can also act as developers when needed. But big companies may lack those resources. Unix providers may be capable of offering companies, out of box, not only a unified OS but also their decades of experience and support plus all the needed ready-made server software on top of Unix. In that sense Unix like Solaris can still be quite competitive, especially in the high-end market.

Reply Score: 0

strcpy Member since:
2009-05-20

Solaris and other Unix variants are good, and have some features lacking from Linux. But let's not forget that almost 90 % of the world's top 500 super computers already run Linux and that trend is only growing: http://blog.internetnews.com/skerner/2009/11/linux-dominates-top-50... That should make it quite clear to everyone that Linux is perfectly ready for (if not already dominating) the high-end server field.


In a typical fanboy fashion, you are good at misunderstanding things. High-end stuff, the so-called big iron, has really nothing to do with the so-called "supercomputers". Nor do "supercomputers" serve anything. They just execute flops. And they do it fast. That's their job.

Edited 2010-01-30 03:50 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 7

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Do you realize the fact that those supercompuers have some of the largest and most complex I/O subsystems, file serving, and database/mining applications?

Where do you think the globs of data come to generate all those globs of flops? Pixie dust?


And yes, those supercomputers are considered big iron. In fact, there is no bigger iron than a supercomputer. Heck, the largest IBM Z10 system looks puny when compared to a large CRAY, which yes runs using AMD processors and Linux in all its glory.

Please do not confuse "mainframe" with "big iron." And for what it is worth, IBM will happily sell you an integrated facility for linux® (IFL) subsystem for your shiny new Z-series mainframe.

Edited 2010-01-30 21:09 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

irbis Member since:
2005-07-08

I'm not a fanboy of Linux anymore than of Unix. Instead, I just tried to bring another point to the discussion to balance the discussion. Personally I would have nothing against Unix like Solaris being used more on top super computers too, but the Linux trend there is just clear.

Also, there are many types of and uses for high-end servers, mainframes, clusters and super computers and those classifications are not exclusive but may overlap. However, it is true, especially in history, that big mainframe computers have often come with a Unix OS. But - like can be seen as a general trend in super computers predicting wider change in other high-end computing too - that has started to change too.

Edit: "UNIX arose as a minicomputer operating system; Unix has scaled up over the years to acquire some mainframe characteristics." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainframe_computer A similar kind of development has been happening with Linux nowadays.

What are the exact arguments if someone claims that a general kind of OS good and reliable enough for, say, a cluster based super computer used for expert systems, business predictions, weather modelling, space research etc. today couldn't be a good OS choice for a high-end mainframe too (and vice versa)?

Edited 2010-01-31 00:58 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3